Beyond3D Forum

Vegetto-eX · 20-Mar-2004, 04:01

Well it's time, some of this info in not new and it was speculated before, now is just confirmed.
The card that was running those games was an NV40 ( it was an A2 revision ) clocked at 475mhz Core and 1.2ghz memory ( gddr3 ) and 256mb. The card IT IS 16x1 as the fillrate shows it. With 3dmark2001 give results of 7010 Mpixels/s for single texturing and 7234 Mpixels/s for multi texturing ( pretty impressive don't? ).The PS performance is boosted a lot, at least 2.5x faster and even got to 5x faster.The AA used in the pics is RGMSAA at 4x, the maximum AF ( on this drivers, 56.55 ) was 8x but I think that we will see 16x. In most of the games the performance was 2.5x to 3x faster than my FX5950 using high resolution and AA as well as AF and well the IQ...... what can I say? is far far better. Now some things, they were a lot of problems, mostly corrupted textures, but not in any of the tested games, I'm 100% sure that at launch the drivers will pack a lot more of features just for the NV40. In other thing, I can't argue that indeed there is some blurring in those SS, but first think:

1) if you don't zoom the picture it looks just damn good.
2) there are no final drivers, so no final AA or AF levels.
3) I'm not saying is better than ati or anything like that, I just think is WAY better than any other Nvidia card.

and for a matter of speed, remember that A2 is no the final revision, so the final "could" be a little faster. Well that's all... at least all I can say now, there is something else but I risk too much and I have a promise, maybe later in this month, but I have said everything I know, hope you like it, and again excuse my bad english

Halo ( no AA, 8x AF ) 1600x1200 51.1fps
Far Cry ( no AA, no AF ) 1600x1200 53.4fps
UT2004 ( 4xAA, 4xAF ) 1600x1200 71.9fps - 1280x960 82.9fps ( both botmach )
Star Wars Kotor ( 4xAA, 8xAF ) 1600x1200 49.3fps

Natoma · 20-Mar-2004, 04:03

Quote:

Originally Posted by Vegetto-eX

UT2004 ( 4xAA, 4xAF ) 1600x1200 71.9fps - 1280x960 82.9fps ( both botmach )

Omg..... That's insane.

Tim Murray · 20-Mar-2004, 04:06

Well, we've about hit our quota of NV40 rumors... Help Me R420, you're my... uhhh... other hope?

digitalwanderer · 20-Mar-2004, 04:10

Wow, just wow.

Thanks, you get the front page.

bloodbob · 20-Mar-2004, 04:11

Hmm mkay looks like some post processing is going on then I guess I was wrong but then again I assumed Nvidia weren't fiddling with the rendered images already. ( I'm assuming 1x guassian filter is applied as a post proccess ).

Though 7 Gigapixel fillrate that insane I'm guessing nvidia seems to have liked ATI bruteforce approach :P

Now all we need is like 5 GHz processors so we can play Doom3 without being CPU limited with that card.

ninelven · 20-Mar-2004, 04:11

Don't suppose you could tell us what kind of computer it was running on?

digitalwanderer · 20-Mar-2004, 04:12

Could we possibly get a 3dm2k1se and 3dm2k3 score?

Rugor · 20-Mar-2004, 04:14

That does sound impressive. Certainly a huge step forwards from NV3x. Now all we need to do is get some comparisons of it and R420 and then the fur would really fly.

SsP45 · 20-Mar-2004, 04:14

Even if the R420 is a 12-piped card, it would have to be clocked at 633Mhz to have the same fillrate as that.
________
HERBAL VAPORIZER

tEd · 20-Mar-2004, 04:15

Quote:

Originally Posted by digitalwanderer

Could we possibly get a 3dm2k1se and 3dm2k3 score?

WHAT with unverified drivers. Are you nuts!

j/k

quest55720 · 20-Mar-2004, 04:18

If this is for real then we must tip our hats to the enginers at nvidia. What a beast I can not imagine ati being able to touch that.

digitalwanderer · 20-Mar-2004, 04:21

Quote:

Originally Posted by tEd

Quote:

Originally Posted by digitalwanderer

Could we possibly get a 3dm2k1se and 3dm2k3 score?

WHAT with unverified drivers. Are you nuts!

j/k

Hush you! I'll be a hypocrite to get an idea of it's performance!

BTW-Anyone wanna take bets on how long before B3D melts down? I have the damnest feeling this thread is going to get VERY popular.

SsP45 · 20-Mar-2004, 04:21

Quote:

Originally Posted by quest55720

If this is for real then we must tip our hats to the enginers at nvidia. What a beast I can not imagine ati being able to touch that.

Agreed.
________
Henry Ford Picture

digitalwanderer · 20-Mar-2004, 04:23

Quote:

Originally Posted by quest55720

If this is for real then we must tip our hats to the enginers at nvidia. What a beast I can not imagine ati being able to touch that.

I can.

I'll agree that if this is it than some folks at nVidia will be deserving of some credit, but don't discount ATi until next week.....mmm-kay?

SsP45 · 20-Mar-2004, 04:24

Quote:

Originally Posted by digitalwanderer

Quote:

Originally Posted by quest55720

If this is for real then we must tip our hats to the enginers at nvidia. What a beast I can not imagine ati being able to touch that.

I can.

I'll agree that if this is it than some folks at nVidia will be deserving of some credit, but don't discount ATi until next week.....mmm-kay?

If ATI can manage to beat a card like that, I will have Dave Orton's babies.
________
EXHAUST ULTIMATE POWER VALVE

Vegetto-eX · 20-Mar-2004, 04:24

Quote:

Originally Posted by digitalwanderer

Could we possibly get a 3dm2k1se and 3dm2k3 score?

Yes but there is no link, you can guess that he wasn't able to public that score...... but more than 36K, 3dmark03 didn't run, give him an error of non detectable device.... :?

His system was, Athlon 64 3200+, 1GB Ram Pc-4000, HDD 160gb Sata, Gigabyte GA-K8VT800 (VIA KT880).

bloodbob · 20-Mar-2004, 04:24

Quote:

Originally Posted by quest55720

If this is for real then we must tip our hats to the enginers at nvidia. What a beast I can not imagine ati being able to touch that.

LOL we don't know what the yields are like ATM those cards might cost 10K each

thought I am certianly impressed but we are going to need between 30 and 60 gigabytes per second mem bus to get full speed(( 7.6 gigapixel * 4bytes) + texturecaching_constant( 7.6 giga texels * 4bytes )) and if we start doing float textures that can double again in size.

Rugor · 20-Mar-2004, 04:24

Quote:

Originally Posted by quest55720

If this is for real then we must tip our hats the the enginers at nvidia. What a beast I can not imagine ati being able to touch that.

I don't know about that. Those are certainly good numbers, but I'd hold off on speculating about how it compares to R420 until we know more about that one. Both sides have good engineers, and I'm sure ATI could have produced a chip as fast or faster. Whether they could have made their power, transistor, or yield targets doing it is another question.

jvd · 20-Mar-2004, 04:24

Quote:

Originally Posted by Natoma

Quote:

Originally Posted by Vegetto-eX

UT2004 ( 4xAA, 4xAF ) 1600x1200 71.9fps - 1280x960 82.9fps ( both botmach )

Omg..... That's insane.

It those numbers are true nvidia is going to need a dual nv40 to stay in the game .

991060 · 20-Mar-2004, 04:25

nVIDIA won its credit if the number is obtained in FP32 mode.

quest55720 · 20-Mar-2004, 04:28

This brings back memorys of the 9700 pro launch. Specs and performance that were mindblowing. Unless ati has some trick up thier sleeve I think they could be in big trouble.

Vegetto-eX · 20-Mar-2004, 04:29

bah I missed something with 16-bit Z the fillrate was 7190 for single texturing and 7330 for multi texturing :?

991060 · 20-Mar-2004, 04:33

Quote:

Originally Posted by Vegetto-eX

bah I missed something with 16-bit Z the fillrate was 7190 for single texturing and 7330 for multi texturing :?

Does it affect the number a lot? I haven't used 3dmark for a long time. :?

Vegetto-eX · 20-Mar-2004, 04:34

Quote:

Originally Posted by 991060

Quote:

Originally Posted by Vegetto-eX

bah I missed something with 16-bit Z the fillrate was 7190 for single texturing and 7330 for multi texturing :?

Does it affect the number a lot? I haven't used 3dmark for a long time. :?

No it doesn't affect at all...... I mean with such a huge fill rate 200Mpixels/s more does anything?

zsouthboy · 20-Mar-2004, 04:38

Question: How much will a card based on Nv40 cost at launch?

I've got $300 that i'll throw into a new card, either R420 or Nv40 (whichever is faster in the games i play).... so that ought to at least get the "vanilla" version of the card, eh?

i can't wait, i'm so excited!

20-Mar-2004, 04:01	#1
Vegetto-eX Junior Member Join Date: Mar 2004 Location: Lurking in some companies.... Posts: 43	A promise is a promise :) there you go! Well it's time, some of this info in not new and it was speculated before, now is just confirmed. The card that was running those games was an NV40 ( it was an A2 revision ) clocked at 475mhz Core and 1.2ghz memory ( gddr3 ) and 256mb. The card IT IS 16x1 as the fillrate shows it. With 3dmark2001 give results of 7010 Mpixels/s for single texturing and 7234 Mpixels/s for multi texturing ( pretty impressive don't? ).The PS performance is boosted a lot, at least 2.5x faster and even got to 5x faster.The AA used in the pics is RGMSAA at 4x, the maximum AF ( on this drivers, 56.55 ) was 8x but I think that we will see 16x. In most of the games the performance was 2.5x to 3x faster than my FX5950 using high resolution and AA as well as AF and well the IQ...... what can I say? is far far better. Now some things, they were a lot of problems, mostly corrupted textures, but not in any of the tested games, I'm 100% sure that at launch the drivers will pack a lot more of features just for the NV40. In other thing, I can't argue that indeed there is some blurring in those SS, but first think: 1) if you don't zoom the picture it looks just damn good. 2) there are no final drivers, so no final AA or AF levels. 3) I'm not saying is better than ati or anything like that, I just think is WAY better than any other Nvidia card. and for a matter of speed, remember that A2 is no the final revision, so the final "could" be a little faster. Well that's all... at least all I can say now, there is something else but I risk too much and I have a promise, maybe later in this month, but I have said everything I know, hope you like it, and again excuse my bad english Halo ( no AA, 8x AF ) 1600x1200 51.1fps Far Cry ( no AA, no AF ) 1600x1200 53.4fps UT2004 ( 4xAA, 4xAF ) 1600x1200 71.9fps - 1280x960 82.9fps ( both botmach ) Star Wars Kotor ( 4xAA, 8xAF ) 1600x1200 49.3fps

20-Mar-2004, 04:10	#4
digitalwanderer Dangerously Mirthful Join Date: Feb 2002 Location: Winfield, IN USA Posts: 15,292	Wow, just wow. Thanks, you get the front page. __________________ Elite Bastards - Adminish “Be polite, be professional, but have a plan to kill everybody you meet.” - General James N. Mattis

20-Mar-2004, 04:11	#5
bloodbob Trollipop Join Date: May 2003 Location: Australia Posts: 1,630	Hmm mkay looks like some post processing is going on then I guess I was wrong but then again I assumed Nvidia weren't fiddling with the rendered images already. ( I'm assuming 1x guassian filter is applied as a post proccess ). Though 7 Gigapixel fillrate that insane I'm guessing nvidia seems to have liked ATI bruteforce approach :P Now all we need is like 5 GHz processors so we can play Doom3 without being CPU limited with that card. __________________ Trolls find me soo tastey :P

20-Mar-2004, 04:12	#7
digitalwanderer Dangerously Mirthful Join Date: Feb 2002 Location: Winfield, IN USA Posts: 15,292	Could we possibly get a 3dm2k1se and 3dm2k3 score? __________________ Elite Bastards - Adminish “Be polite, be professional, but have a plan to kill everybody you meet.” - General James N. Mattis

20-Mar-2004, 04:14	#8
Rugor Member Join Date: May 2003 Posts: 221	That does sound impressive. Certainly a huge step forwards from NV3x. Now all we need to do is get some comparisons of it and R420 and then the fur would really fly. __________________ Better a friend with steel at your back than a foe with steel in your back.

20-Mar-2004, 04:06	#3
Tim Murray chaos dunk Join Date: May 2003 Location: Mountain View, CA Posts: 3,274	Well, we've about hit our quota of NV40 rumors... Help Me R420, you're my... uhhh... other hope?

20-Mar-2004, 04:11	#6
ninelven PM Join Date: Dec 2002 Posts: 1,374	Don't suppose you could tell us what kind of computer it was running on?

20-Mar-2004, 04:14	#9
SsP45 Member Join Date: Feb 2003 Location: Canada Posts: 141	Even if the R420 is a 12-piped card, it would have to be clocked at 633Mhz to have the same fillrate as that. ________ HERBAL VAPORIZER Last edited by SsP45; 13-Mar-2011 at 08:18.

20-Mar-2004, 04:18	#11
quest55720 Member Join Date: Jun 2003 Posts: 862	i am stunned. If this is for real then we must tip our hats to the enginers at nvidia. What a beast I can not imagine ati being able to touch that.

20-Mar-2004, 04:25	#20
991060 Member Join Date: Jul 2003 Location: Beijing Posts: 640	nVIDIA won its credit if the number is obtained in FP32 mode.

20-Mar-2004, 04:28	#21
quest55720 Member Join Date: Jun 2003 Posts: 862	It feels like the 9700 pro launch. This brings back memorys of the 9700 pro launch. Specs and performance that were mindblowing. Unless ati has some trick up thier sleeve I think they could be in big trouble.

20-Mar-2004, 04:29	#22
Vegetto-eX Junior Member Join Date: Mar 2004 Location: Lurking in some companies.... Posts: 43	bah I missed something with 16-bit Z the fillrate was 7190 for single texturing and 7330 for multi texturing :?

20-Mar-2004, 04:38	#25
zsouthboy Member Join Date: Aug 2003 Location: Derry, NH Posts: 563	Question: How much will a card based on Nv40 cost at launch? I've got $300 that i'll throw into a new card, either R420 or Nv40 (whichever is faster in the games i play).... so that ought to at least get the "vanilla" version of the card, eh? i can't wait, i'm so excited!

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Didn't Ati promise availability in 30 days since launch?	Mendel	3D & Semiconductor Industry	24	06-Jul-2005 23:43
ATI Ships RADEON 9800 PRO, Fulfills Delivery Promise	Dave Baumann	Press Releases	10	09-Apr-2003 22:13
ATI neglects promise: No supersampling on R300	ram	3D Architectures & Chips	1	11-Jan-2003 19:38

Beyond3D Forum

Welcome, Unregistered.